Interactional Markers in English Medical Research Articles Written by Iranian and Native Authors: A Contrastive Metadiscourse Analysis of Method Section

Fariba Ghadyani, Mohammad Hassan Tahririan

Abstract


To determine the issue of whether there were any significant differences between the groups including Iran ISI, Iran non- ISI, and native authors in binary comparisons as for employing interactional markers, the present study was conducted. To collect the data, 90 'method sections' of  English medical research articles within Iranian ISI, Iranian non- ISI, and native ISI journals written by Iranian and native authors published between 2005 and 2010, were examined. As the model of analysis, Hyland's (2005) taxonomy of metadiscourse markers was used. After performing quantitative and qualitative analyses of the interactional markers, Chi- Square tests were run. The results of the study at p= 0.05 revealed significant differences in binary comparisons made up of native / Iran ISI, native / Iran non- ISI, and Iran ISI/ Iran non-ISI as for employing self-mentions. The findings also demonstrated a significant difference between Native and Iran ISI groups for using boosters. These differences may be influenced by the writers' mother tongue, culture and also by their lack or limited awareness of the rhetorical conventions of English medical academic research writing which are needed to be taken into consideration. 


Full Text:

PDF

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.




Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

2010-2019 (CC-BY) Australian International Academic Centre PTY.LTD.

Advances in Language and Literary Studies

You may require to add the 'aiac.org.au' domain to your e-mail 'safe list’ If you do not receive e-mail in your 'inbox'. Otherwise, you may check your 'Spam mail' or 'junk mail' folders.